Pages:
Author

Topic: The combined sidehack-novak usb stick review thread. AKA GekkoScience BM1384 - page 8. (Read 26345 times)

hero member
Activity: 686
Merit: 500
FUN > ROI
Got word mine arrived and hurried on over to have a play with it Smiley

So far most reviews have focused on performance - and I'll be messing about with that later - but thought I'd focus a bit on other bits and pieces.  For those who are relatively new to this thread, please note that this is for basically an engineering sample and is not necessarily the final product.

Updates for 2015/07/08 with feedback from designers




Beauty shots as typically used in my StickMiners thread.

Documentation
There is none - well, this and the development thread.  Hopefully something will be set up at http://gekkoscience.com/ in due time Smiley
On the other hand: if you've ever used a different small Bitcoin miner, then documentation is practically unnecessary.

Plugging it in
As a USB device, the Compac can plug straight into a USB port, but due to its width and power requirements, a suitable USB hub is recommended.


Software
Using cgminer, the Compac is recognized as an Antminer U3 after the default drivers - Silicon Labs CP2102 drivers - are replaced using Zadig.  Only a single device configuation parameter is needed:
Code:
cgminer -o stratum+tcp://pool_host:pool_port -u username -p password --au3-freq FREQUENCY
The frequencies accepted via cgminer by default are 100 through 250 in these steps:
Code:
100, 125, 150, 175, 193.75, 196.88, 200, 206.25, 212.5, 218.75, 225, 237.5, 243.75, 250
Further frequency support can be compiled in, and is being worked on by GekkoScience.  Higher frequencies do tend require a higher voltage, which is set using a piece of hardware on the board; the cgminer --au3-volt parameter is effectively ignored.  Higher frequencies also draw more power.

Using bfgminer - well, unfortunately I got no further than a single blip of the board's LED and bfgminer throwing an error, no matter the combination of scan settings and drivers:
Code:
Failed to sanity check in lowl-vcom.c windows_usb_get_string():508

bfgminer support can probably be added in the future, but cgminer+zadig works quite well.

Tweaking
The Compac's performance is effectively regulated by three things: its operating frequency, the core voltage, and its temperature.
A higher frequency demands a higher core voltage, uses more power, which makes the chip hotter which may cause increased hardware errors (or worse).
A lower frequency can do with a lower core coltage, uses less power, which lets the chip run cooler.
However, too low a core voltage and the miner will not initialize or cause increased hardware errors.
See the Core voltage adjustment section for a bit more detail.

Dimensions
How big is the Compac?  Overall dimensions are approximately 93mm x 25mm x 14.5mm, and it weighs about 25g.


How does that compare to some other miners?  Bigger than a Block Erupter USB, AntMiner U1/U2 and similar, thinner but longer than a NanoFury 6, but much smaller than a Twin Chip Fury.

( The black bit sticking out the side of the GekkoScience Compac is a female header I soldered on. )

Thickness-wise, it is only marginally thicker than an Antminer U2.
Weight-wise, it is about as heavy as an Antminer U2, a bit less than double that of a Block Erupter USB (14.5g), and a bit less than half that of a Twin Chip Fury (59g).

Heat sink and thermals
The heat sink is essentially the same size as that of the Antminer U2 heat sink, but has 8 fins instead of 7.

The heat sink is bolted down with 3 screws which are pretty easy to remove.  The heat sink sits on top of the Bitmain Technologies BM1384 chip as it's a flip chip design, meaning most of the heat is best evacuated out the top.  The heat sink does overlap the board, something necessitated due to the tall components elsewhere on the board.  An extensive redesign might alleviate that, but from the development thread, earlier layouts had issues of their own.  In the end, this is primarily an aesthetic aspect.

The heat sink also sits a bit off the board as it has to connect to the BM1384 chip.  A few surrounding components (capacitors) are actually a tiny bit taller than the chip, so the heat sink has a small metal spacer to make sure that the heat sink has good thermal contact, instead of sitting on top of those capacitors and 1. not contacting the chip and, worse, 2. potentially shorting out those capacitors.

The heat sink is not the final color: it is planned to be green, at least from GekkoScience themselves, so it might look a little more like this:

GekkoSciencce: I think the actual green for the heatsinks will be more "evergreen"

Third party sellers - e.g. the German licensor - may opt for a different color, and the sides of the heat sink provide ample branding space, be it a simple Dymo labelmaker sticker, silkscreen printing or (laser) engraving.

Although the BM1384 is a flip chip, the bottom does get warm as well.  Here's a video of a failed initialization: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWeMsrdrR-8
Note that the thermal tape used here has a range of about 25°C - 35°C, so by no means should this be interpreted as it actually getting hot.  Nevertheless, for those wishing to clock higher, an additional heat sink or heat spreader on the bottom may not be a terrible idea, as long no short circuits are created.

The top of the board also stays fairly cool, although the CP2102 USB serial chip and one of the voltage regulators do get relatively warm even without any load.  When under load, the other components warm up a bit as well, but nowhere near as much as was apparent for the Block Erupter USB test.


LEDs
When plugged in, the Compac will light the LED bright green.  This LED also stays on when the board is hashing away - unlike the Block Erupter USB and a few other miners.  I have to admit that it is sufficiently bright that I put thermal tape on the LED as well to make it a bit less so.  I would recommend a larger resistor value for the green LED to make it a bit more dim and save (a small) amount on current used.  Of course end-users can also take a sharpie to the LED or cover it up.


When the board is hashing away and finds a share, the LED will appear to blink in a bluish white, courtesy of what at first glance may look like a purple color.


This is actually a combination of both blue and orange/amber (not quite red) LED chips within the package.


The blue and orange/amber channels appear to be soldered together, so if you were wondering if there were further statuses - this does not appear to be the case.  

Core voltage adjustment
The core voltage can be adjusted using the trim potentiometer - in the corner of the board opposite that of the GekkoScience logo - using a small screwdriver.

Clockwise = a lower resistance = lower core voltage.
GekkoScience:  [A] thing changed on the V0.5 is the pot rotation direction; it'll be back to clockwise increases voltage instead of counterclockwise

If the core voltage is too low, the board will fail to initialize - after it has initialized, however, the core voltage can be brought down.  This makes testing a bit more difficult than set-and-forget if trying to eke out the lowest power use for a given hash rate.
So far I've found that a 2 o'clock position always facilitates initialization, while 3 o'clock is a bit more prone to failure.  This is likely to vary as trim potentiometers tend to have a fair bit of tolerance and thus differences between components out of the factory.

One thing to note is that the trimpot of choice does not have detents.  What this means is that when you turn it clockwise too far, you can enter a 'dead zone' on the resistance track, in effect bringing the resistance up to the maximum and with it the core voltage.  If you are not using a USB meter or test equipment to monitor the power draw or core voltage directly, you may thus be led to believe you're lowering the core voltage when in reality it just shot up.  Not an issue for tinkerers, but still something to keep in mind.


Core voltage / testing
The core voltage can be monitored directly using the exposed pads on the bottom of the board - although I would recommend soldering a header, preferably female, to those ports to make it easier to hook up some test leads.  Using the core voltage is, arguably, a better measure for exact testing than trim potentiometer angles or power drawn, as the angles are not quite exact and power draw may fluctuate.
There are 5 pads in total , although I have to admit I haven't quite deciphered one of them as of yet; it seems to short to ground.

GekkoScience:  The question-mark pad is indeed GND [...] The final version for production has a single GND pad and RESET is broken out on the fifth pad in case someone needs it.

These pads are, as mentioned, exposed and sit close to any surface the Compac is rested on.  If you were to use multiple Compacs in a fairly dense USB hub, you may wish to enure that the heat sink of one can never short out the pads of another, or put some isolating material between them.  For the production version, I would suggest not exposing these pads by default, leaving off any ENIG/gold plating and keeping solder mask on top of them.  This does mean tinkerers will have to expose the pads specifically if they want to, but makes it a bit less prone to accidental shorts.

Engineering / build quality
I'm going to re-stress that this is effectively an engineering sample, so some of the feedback here is likely to not even apply to the production version.  I'm also going to be semi-harsh, because why not.

The heat sink is reasonable quality.  The screw taps go through the entire thickness which is a bit overkill, and burrs are left around the taps.  This shouldn't pose any practical problems as long as very loose burrs are brushed away to prevent any of them falling out and accidentally shorting things.
GekkoScience: They were samples sent from the factory, drilled from stock they already had run out.
The components are all good quality.  No cracked inductors here.
Component and trace layout is decent.  I can't really comment on this as I know GekkoScience faced issues earlier on and some of the layout decisions may have stemmed from alleviating those issues.  There's a few 90° angles that could probably be avoided, but with modern fabrication and them not being part of any high frequency signalling paths, not really an issue.
The PCB itself is of pretty good quality.  It's a 4-layer 1.6mm board, with good alignment of solder mask, copper and drills.
Soldering is decent, given that it was done outside of a professional setup.  There are quite a few solder balls around, but none of them posing an acute problem.  GekkoScience have already mentioned that they're getting a nice SMD soldering station, so this should not be an issue going into production.
GekkoScience:  We have inbound [...] a pick-and-place and an IR oven so placement and soldering should be a fair bit more precise on the end product.
The silkscreen printing is minimalistic - i.e. there's no component indicators let alone values.  I understand that future versions have the pads on the bottom labeled, at least.
GekkoScience: On the final version, the pads on the back are labeled.

Not really applicable to the Compac itself, but: packaging for shipment was also quite good. Antistatic bag, bubble wrap, wedged diagonally in a sturdy box so it wasn't going to shift around despite typical postal treatment.

Sub-verdict for this post
The GekkoScience Compac is a solid StickMiner, certainly has raised a few eyebrows in regard to the performance, and in terms of tinkering allows a fair bit of control for a trade-off of speed, power usage, and acceptable HW error rates.  A few niggles aside - that may or may not be addressed in production version(s) - this is a miner that most users should be able to use almost entirely out of the box.

One might even say that the GekkoScience Compac is the miner that the Antminer U3 should have been.
With the Antminer U3 instead being the Antminer P1, and preferably tested better
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 1848
Curmudgeonly hardware guy
I didn't reset the voltage on those sticks before I sent them out, so it'll probably run hotter than the first. It should be stable to 225MHz at the current setting (at which speed it draws approximately 1A)

Yep. I had 'em running hot for a few days to see if they'd do it, but I didn't have time to reset everything so I pulled and packed them as-is which meant you were probably running it about half a volt higher than it actually needed.

Oh by the way...

legendary
Activity: 1973
Merit: 1007
I've received the second test unit and I'm happy to say it ran all weekend at the same hashrate as the first. I did notice it was running a bit hotter than the first rev and was surprised to see it was running at almost twice the temp when I pulled out the IR gun. I had let it run at sidehack's voltage settings, which I readjusted today, so I'm not sure if the unit was damaged over the weekend.



Cgminer 4.9.2 appears to be resetting both units every few minutes but it hasn't really affected the hashrate. Probably need to adjust the timeout


U2 Size comparison


Can't touch this...

legendary
Activity: 4116
Merit: 7849
'The right to privacy matters'
philipma, what are you doing with 1-2-3 blocks?  Wink



work wonders for cooling.  look like swiss cheese bro.
hero member
Activity: 1249
Merit: 506
philipma, what are you doing with 1-2-3 blocks?  Wink

legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 1848
Curmudgeonly hardware guy
Novak and I noticed some discrepancies with the hex values I was using and the hex values from S5 code, which probably caused most of the issues. The sticks, when given an invalid hex, jumped up to freakish current draw without being detected.

I'll link an archive with the modified files for cgminer 4.9.0 that we have working here in a bit. I haven't tested every frequency step but I know 287.5MHz and 300MHz work.



[EDIT] http://gekkoscience.com/misc/compac/compac-cgminer.zip  contains modified cgminer.c and driver-icarus.c which should compile into a cgminer 4.9.0 which gives 6.25MHz granularity from 100MHz to 300MHz for the U3, and consequently for our Compacs
legendary
Activity: 4116
Merit: 7849
'The right to privacy matters'
Building cgminer on Windows with MinGW, step-by-step (2015-07-06) - includes the freq change steps.  Keep in mind sidehack reported lower hash rate / more errors from a build following the steps laid out herein

is this what you dropped linked to me?
a lot of work you did man!
hero member
Activity: 686
Merit: 500
FUN > ROI
Building cgminer on Windows with MinGW, step-by-step (2015-07-06) - includes the freq change steps.  Keep in mind sidehack reported lower hash rate / more errors from a build following the steps laid out herein
legendary
Activity: 4116
Merit: 7849
'The right to privacy matters'
If by "just a bit too hot to touch" you mean "leave your fingers on it indefinitely", then sure. Because they were definitely not too hot to touch.

that is exactly what I mean.

I can take the sticks set on freq 250 and hold them with 2 fingers  for 5 or more minutes (allowing the fan to still hit and cool the stick)

I was guessing the 300 freq would be too hot to do this for 1 or 2 minutes

with one stick at 5.2 watts

the other at 7.39  that extra 2 watts is too much for long term holding of the sticks.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 1848
Curmudgeonly hardware guy
If by "just a bit too hot to touch" you mean "leave your fingers on it indefinitely", then sure. Because they were definitely not too hot to touch.
legendary
Activity: 4116
Merit: 7849
'The right to privacy matters'
Very nice Smiley  Is that already a cross-compile for Windows (for phil et al)?  I wonder what the issue might be with 4.9.2 - no problems here (stock or custom), but that's not on a U3 / Compac.


I have not yet tried to do your linked software. I  got  too busy. with some other stuff.

Now that sidehack is doing 300mhz and getting   .44 watts   use a fan and just a bit to hot to touch  5.03volts at 1.47 amps = 7.39 watts


 and I did 250mhz getting .36 watts  use a fan and you can hold them just warm  1.1 amps x 4.73 volts = 5.203 watts


I am thinking 275 may be a good compromise.  along with  6 watts or 6.3 watts per stick


To all please remember these 250, 275, 300 settings will need a very good hub and a fan



In the long run I may do a 5-10 stick fun miner and run at  freq 218.75  they will not need a bridge for power and should cool well with my fans.



hero member
Activity: 686
Merit: 500
FUN > ROI
Very nice Smiley  Is that already a cross-compile for Windows (for phil et al)?  I wonder what the issue might be with 4.9.2 - no problems here (stock or custom), but that's not on a U3 / Compac.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 1848
Curmudgeonly hardware guy
So, we got some cgminer 4.9.0 edited to take up to 300MHz in 6.25MHz increments. I haven't started tuning the stick for min stable voltage, but I got it to light up at 300MHz off 730mV core, pulling 5.03V 1.47A off the line which gives us a stick-level power of 7.39W for 16.5GH at 0.448W/GH, putting its device-level efficiency prett much on par with an S5. With the fan I had on it, the heatsink was leave-your-fingers-on-it-indefinitely hot.

I'm okay with that.

[EDIT] For a pair of sticks tuned a bit better, I'm seeing 1.38A and 1.42A for an average draw of 1.40A, so 7W or 0.425W/GH
legendary
Activity: 4116
Merit: 7849
'The right to privacy matters'
Unfortunately I can't even provide a proper comparison build; all the cgminer code outside of the frequency options is the same, so any differences would come from not having the exact same libraries used in the official builds, kludge workarounds for compile errors, etc.  Might find out later if there's some egregious difference - if I get around to posting that windows build thread, get some feedback, etc.

Might want to compare against 4.9.2, since that's the codebase used - but I'd be surprised if there's a performance difference between official 4.9.0 and official 4.9.2

The only comparison I have to 4.9.2 is the stock compile on the Pi that didn't enumerate the sticks at all. I'll see about digging up a stock Windows 4.9.2 after I'm done messing with 4.9.0 code on Linux.

4.9.2 upgraded the USB reset for the U3's, (-U3 will USB reset on no shares for 2 seconds instead of 1.), which might be why it's not enumerating the sticks ??.

I get that on my 4.9.2 build.  I really struggled getting zadig to load drivers after that I am good on the two sticks up to freq 250

Also you need a really good hub to drive sticks at freq 250 … my sticks do 1.07 amps and 1.13 amps and pull .36 watts 

So 250 is not bad as a safe top end.
sr. member
Activity: 331
Merit: 250
Unfortunately I can't even provide a proper comparison build; all the cgminer code outside of the frequency options is the same, so any differences would come from not having the exact same libraries used in the official builds, kludge workarounds for compile errors, etc.  Might find out later if there's some egregious difference - if I get around to posting that windows build thread, get some feedback, etc.

Might want to compare against 4.9.2, since that's the codebase used - but I'd be surprised if there's a performance difference between official 4.9.0 and official 4.9.2

The only comparison I have to 4.9.2 is the stock compile on the Pi that didn't enumerate the sticks at all. I'll see about digging up a stock Windows 4.9.2 after I'm done messing with 4.9.0 code on Linux.

4.9.2 upgraded the USB reset for the U3's, (-U3 will USB reset on no shares for 2 seconds instead of 1.), which might be why it's not enumerating the sticks ??.
alh
legendary
Activity: 1843
Merit: 1050

Actually I have wonderful fingernails.  Many women have told me that would pay to have them. Grin

You might not want to repeat that too often to your Wife.....  Smiley
legendary
Activity: 4116
Merit: 7849
'The right to privacy matters'
Hopefully no magic smoke was released in an untimely coincidence.  I'll see about documenting the cgminer build (mis-)steps somewhere (not this thread, way too o/t).  If anybody wants to play with my binary, shoot me a PM - or just wait for sidehack/novak's build Smiley

Not trying the build yet but photos of my gear at freq 250.  I am impressed with these little sticks.

say 2.2 amps x 4.75 volts =  9.9 watts giving 27.46gh  this is 0.36 watts per gh at a high overclock.


you should look into being a hand model Smiley

Actually I have wonderful fingernails.  Many women have told me that would pay to have them. Grin
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 1848
Curmudgeonly hardware guy
Unfortunately I can't even provide a proper comparison build; all the cgminer code outside of the frequency options is the same, so any differences would come from not having the exact same libraries used in the official builds, kludge workarounds for compile errors, etc.  Might find out later if there's some egregious difference - if I get around to posting that windows build thread, get some feedback, etc.

Might want to compare against 4.9.2, since that's the codebase used - but I'd be surprised if there's a performance difference between official 4.9.0 and official 4.9.2

The only comparison I have to 4.9.2 is the stock compile on the Pi that didn't enumerate the sticks at all. I'll see about digging up a stock Windows 4.9.2 after I'm done messing with 4.9.0 code on Linux.
legendary
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1001
Hopefully no magic smoke was released in an untimely coincidence.  I'll see about documenting the cgminer build (mis-)steps somewhere (not this thread, way too o/t).  If anybody wants to play with my binary, shoot me a PM - or just wait for sidehack/novak's build Smiley

Not trying the build yet but photos of my gear at freq 250.  I am impressed with these little sticks.

say 2.2 amps x 4.75 volts =  9.9 watts giving 27.46gh  this is 0.36 watts per gh at a high overclock.


you should look into being a hand model Smiley
hero member
Activity: 686
Merit: 500
FUN > ROI
Unfortunately I can't even provide a proper comparison build; all the cgminer code outside of the frequency options is the same, so any differences would come from not having the exact same libraries used in the official builds, kludge workarounds for compile errors, etc.  Might find out later if there's some egregious difference - if I get around to posting that windows build thread, get some feedback, etc.

Might want to compare against 4.9.2, since that's the codebase used - but I'd be surprised if there's a performance difference between official 4.9.0 and official 4.9.2
Pages:
Jump to: